vinny, you sure like that word putative.
It's like proving black holes exist. The proof involves the influence of their gravity and the black hole can't be observed directly.
GTC should have a fairly easy time to raise funds, but it is very difficult for them to raise funds. They used to be owned by Genzyme, but Genzyme spun them off. There are rationalizations for these situations, all of which I can spin as well as anyone, but those reasons don't seem plausible.
I suppose that GTC should do OK, meaning in the next good market they get back to 1.50. That might be good for anyone that buys here, but that isn’t the sort of investment that GTC bulls are suggesting.
So you can talk about glycosylation all you want, but it still doesn’t sweeten the situation with GTC. I know enough about GTC, what I was asking was how might big pharma dramatically increase yields on these complex proteins without using GTC technology? This is a biotech board; a few posters should be able to speculate on that possibility. To me, that is the only plausible reason why GTC doesn’t seem to excite really big investments.
BTW, I did see some post where Dew said yields were up 2-3 times, but that didn't seem to be dramatic.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
